• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Residents get 6 votes each in suburban NY election(edited)

Deputy Fife

New member
Joined
Jun 11, 2010
Messages
9
Reaction score
5
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Folks, this is possibly some of the worst we've seen yet.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100615/ap_on_el_st_lo/us_voting_rights_election

Residents get 6 votes each in suburban NY election

PORT CHESTER, N.Y. – Arthur Furano voted early — five days before Election Day. And he voted often, flipping the lever six times for his favorite candidate. Furano cast multiple votes on the instructions of a federal judge and the U.S. Department of Justice as part of a new election system crafted to help boost Hispanic representation.

Voters in Port Chester, 25 miles northeast of New York City, are electing village trustees for the first time since the federal government alleged in 2006 that the existing election system was unfair. The election ends Tuesday and results are expected late Tuesday.

Although the village of about 30,000 residents is nearly half Hispanic, no Latino had ever been elected to any of the six trustee seats, which until now were chosen in a conventional at-large election. Most voters were white, and white candidates always won.

Federal Judge Stephen Robinson said that violated the Voting Rights Act, and he approved a remedy suggested by village officials: a system called cumulative voting, in which residents get six votes each to apportion as they wish among the candidates. He rejected a government proposal to break the village into six districts, including one that took in heavily Hispanic areas.

Furano and his wife, Gloria Furano, voted Thursday.

"That was very strange," Arthur Furano, 80, said after voting. "I'm not sure I liked it. All my life, I've heard, `one man, one vote.'"

It's the first time any municipality in New York has used cumulative voting, said Amy Ngai, a director at FairVote, a nonprofit election research and reform group that has been hired to consult. The system is used to elect the school board in Amarillo, Texas, the county commission in Chilton County, Ala., and the City Council in Peoria, Ill.

The judge also ordered Port Chester to implement in-person early voting, allowing residents to show up on any of five days to cast ballots. That, too, is a first in New York, Ngai said.

Village clerk Joan Mancuso said Monday that 604 residents voted early.

Gloria Furano gave one vote each to six candidates. Aaron Conetta gave two votes each to three candidates.

Frances Nurena talked to the inspectors about the new system, grabbed some educational material and went home to study. After all, it was only Thursday. She could vote on Friday, Saturday or Tuesday.

"I understand the voting," she said. "But since I have time, I'm going to learn more about the candidates."

On Tuesday, Candida Sandoval voted at the Don Bosco Center, where a soup kitchen and day-laborer hiring center added to the activity, and where federal observers watched the voting from a table in the corner.

"I hope that if Hispanics get in, they do something for all the Hispanic people," Sandoval said in Spanish. "I don't know, but I hope so."

FairVote said cumulative voting allows a political minority to gain representation if it organizes and focuses its voting strength on specific candidates. Two of the 13 Port Chester trustee candidates — one Democrat and one Republican — are Hispanic. A third Hispanic is running a write-in campaign after being taken off the ballot on a technicality.
This makes Barney irate and high-pitched in voice for two reasons:

1. The judge invoked the lack of elected Hispanic representation as a VIOLATION of the Voting Rights Act, and proceeded to ORDER the district to adopt measures to ENSURE the election of a Hispanic candidate, regardless of substance or character, to the city council just because of his/her skin color.

2. The US Department of Justice WAS involved and once again Chicago style politics are deliberately pushing elections in the favor of state-sponsored candidates.

Some people will be like, "But everyone gets six votes!"

But you don't understand. There are more white candidates than Hispanic candidates. Despite a 50% Hispanic population, turnout is very low for their community and a six vote tally will allow the Hispanic voters to pool their six votes in the smaller Hispanic contingency of candidates, statistically outvoting Caucasian voters who would spread their votes over all the candidates rather than just the Hispanic ones.

A very clever and very sinister ploy to hand pick candidates. Not to mention completely unconstitutional.
 

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,955
Reaction score
12,423
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Folks, this is possibly some of the worst we've seen yet.

Residents get 6 votes each in suburban NY election - Yahoo! News



This makes Barney irate and high-pitched in voice for two reasons:

1. The judge invoked the lack of elected Hispanic representation as a VIOLATION of the Voting Rights Act, and proceeded to ORDER the district to adopt measures to ENSURE the election of a Hispanic candidate, regardless of substance or character, to the city council just because of his/her skin color.

2. The US Department of Justice WAS involved and once again Chicago style politics are deliberately pushing elections in the favor of state-sponsored candidates.

Some people will be like, "But everyone gets six votes!"

But you don't understand. There are more white candidates than Hispanic candidates. Despite a 50% Hispanic population, turnout is very low for their community and a six vote tally will allow the Hispanic voters to pool their six votes in the smaller Hispanic contingency of candidates, statistically outvoting Caucasian voters who would spread their votes over all the candidates rather than just the Hispanic ones.

A very clever and very sinister ploy to hand pick candidates. Not to mention completely unconstitutional.
How in the hell does that violate the voting rights act?

What is this world coming to. :roll:
 

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,893
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
FairVote said cumulative voting allows a political minority to gain representation if it organizes and focuses its voting strength on specific candidates.
Read: Cumulative voting allows a minority group to gain representation if it votes strictly along racial lines, allocating all its votes to one or two preferred candidates.
 

Deputy Fife

New member
Joined
Jun 11, 2010
Messages
9
Reaction score
5
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Read: Cumulative voting allows a minority group to gain representation if it votes strictly along racial lines, allocating all its votes to one or two preferred candidates.
Yes, that's exactly what I was referring to in my final point. Not only is it permissable to race-based elections, but also encourages it by stacking the deck.

Seriously screwed up.
 

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,893
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Can't they just do that with a single vote?
Most articles are very unclear on the exact details, but I believe this is how it worked:

Originally, there were six at-large seats up for election each year. Everyone was allowed to vote for six different people and the top six vote-getters won the election.

Now, everyone still has six votes, but you can allocate more than one vote for each person

The result is that this particular system creates a substantial reward for insularism.

Some of the details for what prompted this case were particularly ridiculous:

Latinos made up 46 percent of the village’s roughly 28,000 people in the most recent census, in 2000, though many were not American citizens. About 43 percent of residents were non-Hispanic whites and 7 percent were blacks, according to the census. No Latino has ever been elected to the six-member village board, and the preferred candidates among Latino voters have usually been defeated.

The odds against winning have been so daunting, Latino advocates say, that only two Hispanic candidates have ever been on the ballot, most recently Cesar Ruiz, who won nearly the entire Latino vote in 2001 but still lost the election.
So exactly two Latinos have ever even run and lost and this is somehow proof of discrimination?

But hey, with numbers like that, there's no possible explanation for those losses other than racism, right?

Even those Latino candidates do not appear terribly optimistic about their prospects.

“What can I tell you? I’m working hard to get elected,” said the Democrat, Luis Marino, 43, a volunteer firefighter in Port Chester who works in the maintenance department of the Scarsdale school system. “If I don’t get in, I’m not going to get upset or anything like that. If I win, excellent.”

Mr. Marino, who was born in Peru, has not helped his chances by eschewing time-honored campaigning techniques like ringing doorbells and walking the neighborhoods to chat with voters.

“I don’t do much walking door to door because I don’t believe in that,” he said. “I don’t like to harass people or aggravate people.” His preferred campaign method? “I just call all my friends and ask them if they’ll vote for me.”
Yea, it's gotta be racism.
 

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,955
Reaction score
12,423
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Most articles are very unclear on the exact details, but I believe this is how it worked:

Originally, there were six at-large seats up for election each year. Everyone was allowed to vote for six different people and the top six vote-getters won the election.

Now, everyone still has six votes, but you can allocate more than one vote for each person

The result is that this particular system creates a substantial reward for insularism.

Some of the details for what prompted this case were particularly ridiculous:



So exactly two Latinos have ever even run and lost and this is somehow proof of discrimination?

But hey, with numbers like that, there's no possible explanation for those losses other than racism, right?



Yea, it's gotta be racism.
I propose you find a way to recall that judge, if possible.
The reasoning is so awful, I can't begin to explain how asinine this is.
 

upsideguy

Pragmatic Idealist
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
17,124
Reaction score
9,983
Location
Rocky Mtn. High
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Folks, this is possibly some of the worst we've seen yet.

Residents get 6 votes each in suburban NY election - Yahoo! News

This makes Barney irate and high-pitched in voice for two reasons:

1. The judge invoked the lack of elected Hispanic representation as a VIOLATION of the Voting Rights Act, and proceeded to ORDER the district to adopt measures to ENSURE the election of a Hispanic candidate, regardless of substance or character, to the city council just because of his/her skin color.

2. The US Department of Justice WAS involved and once again Chicago style politics are deliberately pushing elections in the favor of state-sponsored candidates.

Some people will be like, "But everyone gets six votes!"

But you don't understand. There are more white candidates than Hispanic candidates. Despite a 50% Hispanic population, turnout is very low for their community and a six vote tally will allow the Hispanic voters to pool their six votes in the smaller Hispanic contingency of candidates, statistically outvoting Caucasian voters who would spread their votes over all the candidates rather than just the Hispanic ones.

A very clever and very sinister ploy to hand pick candidates. Not to mention completely unconstitutional.

I wouldn't be wasting your lone bullet on this one Barney. Besides, where did you get this one man / one vote bunk? In America its one dollar / one vote.
 

FilmFestGuy

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 13, 2009
Messages
2,120
Reaction score
1,244
Location
Nashville, TN
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Folks, this is possibly some of the worst we've seen yet.

Residents get 6 votes each in suburban NY election - Yahoo! News



This makes Barney irate and high-pitched in voice for two reasons:

1. The judge invoked the lack of elected Hispanic representation as a VIOLATION of the Voting Rights Act, and proceeded to ORDER the district to adopt measures to ENSURE the election of a Hispanic candidate, regardless of substance or character, to the city council just because of his/her skin color.

2. The US Department of Justice WAS involved and once again Chicago style politics are deliberately pushing elections in the favor of state-sponsored candidates.

Some people will be like, "But everyone gets six votes!"

But you don't understand. There are more white candidates than Hispanic candidates. Despite a 50% Hispanic population, turnout is very low for their community and a six vote tally will allow the Hispanic voters to pool their six votes in the smaller Hispanic contingency of candidates, statistically outvoting Caucasian voters who would spread their votes over all the candidates rather than just the Hispanic ones.

A very clever and very sinister ploy to hand pick candidates. Not to mention completely unconstitutional.
If this were about a state or federal race, I might join you in your high-pitched voice anger.

It's about a municipality. They can set their elections how they like - as long as the individuals are all treated equally, which, in this case, they are.

It's weird, I grant you. But it's hardly unconstitutional.
 

jujuman13

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 1, 2006
Messages
4,075
Reaction score
579
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
If this were about a state or federal race, I might join you in your high-pitched voice anger.

It's about a municipality. They can set their elections how they like - as long as the individuals are all treated equally, which, in this case, they are.

It's weird, I grant you. But it's hardly unconstitutional.
Unfortunately it is setting a standard that should not be set.
At some stage might this not set a precedent for higher elections?
 

Mcygee

New member
Joined
Jun 14, 2010
Messages
18
Reaction score
3
Location
Dallas, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Very fishy politics. Everybody gets one vote. It's fair, and it has always been fair. Any manipulation of that is an attempt to change the system one way or another, and changing a completely fair and free system is never good for ANY reason.

Also this is NOT just ok because it's only a local election. This was under the instructions of a FEDERAL JUDGE. This isn't being done specifically under the instruction of the local politics. I would tend to agree that if they did this as a choice locally only it would be their decision. But this is the FEDERAL government doing this. Very dangerous to our freedoms.

The libs can't seem to avoid bringing race into everything. The system was without racism before. NOW racism has been brought into it by the left.
 
Last edited:

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,893
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
If this were about a state or federal race, I might join you in your high-pitched voice anger.

It's about a municipality. They can set their elections how they like - as long as the individuals are all treated equally, which, in this case, they are.

It's weird, I grant you. But it's hardly unconstitutional.
I think most of the discomfort comes from the fact that this was hardly the municipality's decision.

In 2006, the Justice Department sued the village under the Voting Rights Act, saying its system of electing six at-large board members denied the Latino population fair representation. A federal court judge agreed and ordered Port Chester to come up with a more equitable process.
the village has spent more than $1 million on legal bills, and estimated it may spend an additional $300,000 to carry out the new process
 

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,893
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Update: One of the Latino candidates won a seat

An unusual election in a New York City suburb, in which voters could cast six ballots for one candidate, apparently resulted Wednesday in the first Hispanic elected to the village Board of Trustees.

Luis Marino, a school district maintenance director, was in fourth place among 13 candidates for six trustee positions in the final but unofficial vote count, said Aldo Vitagliano, a spokesman for the village of Port Chester.

Marino, a Democrat, had 1,962 votes, well back of leader Bart Didden, an independent, who had 2,576. But Marino was well ahead of the seventh-place candidate, who had 1,272. Only 28 affidavit ballots remained to be counted, Vitagliano said.
Hispanic apparent winner in unusual Hudson Valley election | recordonline.com

I guess he had a lot of friends. :lol:
 

FilmFestGuy

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 13, 2009
Messages
2,120
Reaction score
1,244
Location
Nashville, TN
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
I think most of the discomfort comes from the fact that this was hardly the municipality's decision.
I can feel that vibe. But I think it's clear that if the Council had maybe listened to the concerns of 46% of their citizens; it may not have ended up in Court.

I still think it's bizarre decision: for instance, districting could have sovled the issue and not been so weird.

The only point I'm making is that it doesn't appear to violate the Constitution.
 

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,893
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
I can feel that vibe. But I think it's clear that if the Council had maybe listened to the concerns of 46% of their citizens; it may not have ended up in Court.
What makes you say that they weren't listening to the concerns of latinos in the area? Even if we assume that not electing latino board members = "not listening to latino concerns," that 46% was entitled to run candidates and vote for them just like everyone else.
 

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,955
Reaction score
12,423
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,893
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Question for you, if you know.

How does the previous system violate the voting rights act?
What could be rationally drawn out of it to say that it does?
The Voting Rights Act is an incredibly sweeping piece of legislation that gives Congress extraordinary control over voting methods in all sorts of situations. Under Section 2, any election policy or procedure that discriminates against people based on race or color is invalid. More importantly, this applies whether or not the discrimination is intentional - Even if a district's policies are perfectly race-neutral and are not driving by any racial prejudice, the polices are automatically invalid so long as they have a discriminatory effect.

In this case, even though the municipality did nothing to prevent minorities from being elected, the DoJ argued that because no Hispanics had been elected, the municipality had to change its policies to ensure that Hispanics won some seats.
 

roughdraft274

ThunderCougarFalconBird
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 3, 2010
Messages
15,703
Reaction score
9,493
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Very fishy politics. Everybody gets one vote. It's fair, and it has always been fair. Any manipulation of that is an attempt to change the system one way or another, and changing a completely fair and free system is never good for ANY reason.

Also this is NOT just ok because it's only a local election. This was under the instructions of a FEDERAL JUDGE. This isn't being done specifically under the instruction of the local politics. I would tend to agree that if they did this as a choice locally only it would be their decision. But this is the FEDERAL government doing this. Very dangerous to our freedoms.

The libs can't seem to avoid bringing race into everything. The system was without racism before. NOW racism has been brought into it by the left.
The judge was put in place by Bush and it was done under Bush's justice department. I'm not really understanding how this comes back to liberals...
 

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,955
Reaction score
12,423
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
The Voting Rights Act is an incredibly sweeping piece of legislation that gives Congress extraordinary control over voting methods in all sorts of situations. Under Section 2, any election policy or procedure that discriminates against people based on race or color is invalid. More importantly, this applies whether or not the discrimination is intentional - Even if a district's policies are perfectly race-neutral and are not driving by any racial prejudice, the polices are automatically invalid so long as they have a discriminatory effect.

In this case, even though the municipality did nothing to prevent minorities from being elected, the DoJ argued that because no Hispanics had been elected, the municipality had to change its policies to ensure that Hispanics won some seats.
Geesh, what a bunch of crap.

Thanks for the info.
 

Mcygee

New member
Joined
Jun 14, 2010
Messages
18
Reaction score
3
Location
Dallas, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
I tried to find the specific judge. Please link me to where you got your information. Make a note that I'm not asking for proof of what you are saying. I'm not surprised in the least if he was appointed by a republican. Lets not mistake republican for conservative. The two are very different.

I think most people would agree that the decision to unconsitutionally force a local election to change its rules, and doing so in order to get a minority in place who wasn't getting enough votes before is a very liberal move. Would you not agree? I'd have to see this judges history of ruling to decide if they were liberal, conservative, or moderate. I can tell by this ruling they almost certainly are not conservative. Perhaps I should say that his decision was very liberal.

I did jump to conclusions based on limited information. Which I strive to NOT do. So I apologize for the rash response. It was more emotional than intellectual.
 
Last edited:

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,955
Reaction score
12,423
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I tried to find the specific judge. Please link me to where you got your information. Make a note that I'm not asking for proof of what you are saying. I'm not surprised in the least if he was appointed by a republican. Lets not mistake republican for conservative. The two are very different.

I think most people would agree that the decision to unconsitutionally force a local election to change its rules, and doing so in order to get a minority in place who wasn't getting enough votes before is a very liberal move. Would you not agree? I'd have to see this judges history of ruling to decide if they were liberal, conservative, or moderate. I can tell by this ruling they almost certainly are not conservative. Perhaps I should say that his decision was very liberal.
Calling out people as liberals, conservatives etc is very stupid.
The best thing to do is call them what they really are...dumb.

As per RightinNYC's information, the judge has the law on his side, as stupid and as idiotic as the law is.
 

roughdraft274

ThunderCougarFalconBird
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 3, 2010
Messages
15,703
Reaction score
9,493
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I tried to find the specific judge. Please link me to where you got your information. Make a note that I'm not asking for proof of what you are saying. I'm not surprised in the least if he was appointed by a republican. Lets not mistake republican for conservative. The two are very different.

I think most people would agree that the decision to unconsitutionally force a local election to change its rules, and doing so in order to get a minority in place who wasn't getting enough votes before is a very liberal move. Would you not agree? I'd have to see this judges history of ruling to decide if they were liberal, conservative, or moderate. I can tell by this ruling they almost certainly are not conservative. Perhaps I should say that his decision was very liberal.

I did jump to conclusions based on limited information. Which I strive to NOT do. So I apologize for the rash response. It was more emotional than intellectual.
No problem, and no apology needed. If I were perfect then I might make a huge deal out of this but you know how that goes...


Stephen C. Robinson - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Last edited:

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,893
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
I tried to find the specific judge. Please link me to where you got your information. Make a note that I'm not asking for proof of what you are saying. I'm not surprised in the least if he was appointed by a republican. Lets not mistake republican for conservative. The two are very different.

I think most people would agree that the decision to unconsitutionally force a local election to change its rules, and doing so in order to get a minority in place who wasn't getting enough votes before is a very liberal move. Would you not agree? I'd have to see this judges history of ruling to decide if they were liberal, conservative, or moderate. I can tell by this ruling they almost certainly are not conservative. Perhaps I should say that his decision was very liberal.

I did jump to conclusions based on limited information. Which I strive to NOT do. So I apologize for the rash response. It was more emotional than intellectual.
The judge's move wasn't unconstitutional, as he's just doing what Congress provided for in the Voting Rights Act. Because he's a district court judge, he's not entitled to hold that the VRA is unconstitutional. He has to follow the precedents laid down for him by the Second Circuit and the Supreme Court. As a result, it would be consistent with a conservative philosophy (however you want to define that) to apply the law in this fashion, even if he personally thinks that the law is unconstitutional.

Either way, thank you for being so up front and polite. :2wave:
 
Last edited:

Goobieman

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2006
Messages
17,343
Reaction score
2,876
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
1. The judge invoked the lack of elected Hispanic representation as a VIOLATION of the Voting Rights Act, and proceeded to ORDER the district to adopt measures to ENSURE the election of a Hispanic candidate, regardless of substance or character, to the city council just because of his/her skin color.
Just another example of liberals taking offense to the will of the people and going to court to change it.

Under this argument, since no woman has been elected President, women should get extra votes on election day.
 

roughdraft274

ThunderCougarFalconBird
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 3, 2010
Messages
15,703
Reaction score
9,493
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Just another example of liberals taking offense to the will of the people and going to court to change it.

Under this argument, since no woman has been elected President, women should get extra votes on election day.
The ruling wasn't that Hispanics get more votes. It was that everyone gets more votes.

And again, this was done by George Bush's justice department and a judge appointed by George Bush. Why are you whining about liberals?

Hell, even Scalia and Thomas have ruled on cases like these and find them to be constitutional. Those are some big liberal judges, right?
Holder v. Hall, 512 U.S. 874 (June 30, 1994).

Such changes may seem radical departures from the electoral systems with which we are most familiar. Indeed, they may be unwanted by the people in the several States who purposely have adopted districting systems in their electoral laws. But nothing in our present understanding of the Voting Rights Act places a principled limit on the authority of federal courts that would prevent them from instituting a system of cumulative voting as a remedy under §2, or even from establishing a more elaborate mechanism for securing proportional representation based on transferable votes.
 
Top Bottom